Guessing that it is made by Mobil, I do know for a fact that it is 40% synthetic, according to our GM rep.
Dexos 1 Factory Fill
- Thread starter TTK
- Start date
- Status
It better be....otherwise it's ignorance.
Originally Posted By: hpichris
It better be....otherwise it's ignorance.
Too nice a word.
It better be....otherwise it's ignorance.
Too nice a word.
Originally Posted By: BigBird57
Ouch! sorry I struck a nerve. My QS experience is thirty years old with conventional oil. Back then they had too much parafin content in their oils. If it is any consolation I would not use Castrol either. I use Mobil 1 or Amsoil.
Read some of my posts with respect to my experience with QS conventional. That experience runs back thirty years, with millions of miles of combined fleet usage. Quaker State conventional was used exclusively with 6,000 mile OCIs, and no sludge, and no lube related failures. The longest lasting vehicle went 600,000 miles and was driven to its final resting place, with the body no longer up to the task, but the engine running fine.
Ouch! sorry I struck a nerve. My QS experience is thirty years old with conventional oil. Back then they had too much parafin content in their oils. If it is any consolation I would not use Castrol either. I use Mobil 1 or Amsoil.
Read some of my posts with respect to my experience with QS conventional. That experience runs back thirty years, with millions of miles of combined fleet usage. Quaker State conventional was used exclusively with 6,000 mile OCIs, and no sludge, and no lube related failures. The longest lasting vehicle went 600,000 miles and was driven to its final resting place, with the body no longer up to the task, but the engine running fine.
Originally Posted By: BigBird57
Ouch! sorry I struck a nerve. My QS experience is thirty years old with conventional oil. Back then they had too much parafin content in their oils. If it is any consolation I would not use Castrol either. I use Mobil 1 or Amsoil.
Don't feel bad, there is defiantly a northern bias towards QS on this board. I can remember growing here in FL that if you even jokingly suggested using QS in shop or at Speedworld, you would be shunned as a know nothing idiot who was gonna destroy his motor or a dumb snow bird who drove a minivan(worse!).
If it makes you feel better, I still can't get over the bias myself either and smirk every time I see Quaker State or Castrol in Wally's 25 years later. Even with the knowledge that all of those minivans have driven gazillions of miles with out a oil related failure.
Ouch! sorry I struck a nerve. My QS experience is thirty years old with conventional oil. Back then they had too much parafin content in their oils. If it is any consolation I would not use Castrol either. I use Mobil 1 or Amsoil.
Don't feel bad, there is defiantly a northern bias towards QS on this board. I can remember growing here in FL that if you even jokingly suggested using QS in shop or at Speedworld, you would be shunned as a know nothing idiot who was gonna destroy his motor or a dumb snow bird who drove a minivan(worse!).
If it makes you feel better, I still can't get over the bias myself either and smirk every time I see Quaker State or Castrol in Wally's 25 years later. Even with the knowledge that all of those minivans have driven gazillions of miles with out a oil related failure.
Originally Posted By: 3311
Don't feel bad, there is defiantly a northern bias towards QS on this board. I can remember growing here in FL that if you even jokingly suggested using QS in shop or at Speedworld, you would be shunned as a know nothing idiot who was gonna destroy his motor or a dumb snow bird who drove a minivan(worse!).
In fairness to BigBird57, when he speaks of problems in the 1980s, things were a little different then, too. However, it wasn't solely Quaker State's (or Pennzoil's or Castrol's) fault. Oils weren't as good then as they are now, of course, but a look at my fleet history fills a bit into the puzzle.
Back in the early 1980s, there certainly was talk about some of the conventionals not being great. Back then, too, a lot of the emissions technology was in its infancy. The feedback carbs back then, for instance, usually didn't work right when new, let alone when they accumulated miles. Huge fuel dilution was an issue.
My fleet ran solely on LPG. Fuel dilution was immediately removed from the equation. I certainly would have hesitated to go for 6,000 mile OCIs in the early 1980s in a car with a feedback carb. By the early 1990s, however, I did run gasoline cars at that OCI without problems, since fuel injection was a fairly solid technology by then.
The point is, don't blame the oil if the engine design was hard on the oil. I don't doubt that Mobil 1 or Amsoil would have been better choices with such engines, or simply doing more frequent OCIs.
Don't feel bad, there is defiantly a northern bias towards QS on this board. I can remember growing here in FL that if you even jokingly suggested using QS in shop or at Speedworld, you would be shunned as a know nothing idiot who was gonna destroy his motor or a dumb snow bird who drove a minivan(worse!).
In fairness to BigBird57, when he speaks of problems in the 1980s, things were a little different then, too. However, it wasn't solely Quaker State's (or Pennzoil's or Castrol's) fault. Oils weren't as good then as they are now, of course, but a look at my fleet history fills a bit into the puzzle.
Back in the early 1980s, there certainly was talk about some of the conventionals not being great. Back then, too, a lot of the emissions technology was in its infancy. The feedback carbs back then, for instance, usually didn't work right when new, let alone when they accumulated miles. Huge fuel dilution was an issue.
My fleet ran solely on LPG. Fuel dilution was immediately removed from the equation. I certainly would have hesitated to go for 6,000 mile OCIs in the early 1980s in a car with a feedback carb. By the early 1990s, however, I did run gasoline cars at that OCI without problems, since fuel injection was a fairly solid technology by then.
The point is, don't blame the oil if the engine design was hard on the oil. I don't doubt that Mobil 1 or Amsoil would have been better choices with such engines, or simply doing more frequent OCIs.
Special Custom syn blend made by Mobil. It is similar to Val's Durablend. That's it.
Dealership's bulk is going to be Service Pros syn blend. (Good chance is who makes the Delco oil too) Good chance the the Mobil version will be avaliable here too..(depending on the dealership)
There you go...
Dealership's bulk is going to be Service Pros syn blend. (Good chance is who makes the Delco oil too) Good chance the the Mobil version will be avaliable here too..(depending on the dealership)
There you go...
Exxon-Mobil (and many other suppliers) will blend tank truck loads or rail car loads to any spec a big buyer wants. It can be the same, or it can be quite different from any retail product.
Quaker State full of paraffin??? Gimme a break. The solvent refining process to remove wax from oil was developed over 70 years ago. The oil had no more wax in it than any other oil. (I used to hear the same thing about Pennzoil years ago.) Probably the source of this myth is that years ago they were actually made from crude oil from Pennsylvania, and that was "paraffinic" crude oil, the best type for lubricants. While that crude oil does contain wax, it contains over 50% saturated hydrocarbons (hydrogen attached to the molecule instead of oxygen) which makes better lube oil. By the way, the slack wax removed from crude oil can be hydroisomerized into a true synthetic Group III base oil of excellent quality.
Quaker State full of paraffin??? Gimme a break. The solvent refining process to remove wax from oil was developed over 70 years ago. The oil had no more wax in it than any other oil. (I used to hear the same thing about Pennzoil years ago.) Probably the source of this myth is that years ago they were actually made from crude oil from Pennsylvania, and that was "paraffinic" crude oil, the best type for lubricants. While that crude oil does contain wax, it contains over 50% saturated hydrocarbons (hydrogen attached to the molecule instead of oxygen) which makes better lube oil. By the way, the slack wax removed from crude oil can be hydroisomerized into a true synthetic Group III base oil of excellent quality.
Originally Posted By: TTK
Ordered a 2011 Chevy truck last week.
Ford comes out with 4 new engines and 6 speed transmissions across the board and you order a Chevy? Why? Cause dad and grandad did also?
Next thing you know, you'll be putting quaker state oil in it, it'll fill up your lifter valley with sluge!
Ordered a 2011 Chevy truck last week.
Ford comes out with 4 new engines and 6 speed transmissions across the board and you order a Chevy? Why? Cause dad and grandad did also?
Next thing you know, you'll be putting quaker state oil in it, it'll fill up your lifter valley with sluge!
Originally Posted By: Brons2
Originally Posted By: TTK
Ordered a 2011 Chevy truck last week.
Ford comes out with 4 new engines and 6 speed transmissions across the board and you order a Chevy? Why? Cause dad and grandad did also?
Next thing you know, you'll be putting quaker state oil in it, it'll fill up your lifter valley with sluge!
LOL
The Chevy truck was the ONLY truck that could be configured the way I wanted it. I like the ranger, but could not get it made the way I wanted it. So, since I am paying for it, I decided to get exactly what I wanted. Likely to keep this truck forever, relatively speaking, of course.
Originally Posted By: TTK
Ordered a 2011 Chevy truck last week.
Ford comes out with 4 new engines and 6 speed transmissions across the board and you order a Chevy? Why? Cause dad and grandad did also?
Next thing you know, you'll be putting quaker state oil in it, it'll fill up your lifter valley with sluge!
LOL
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2010
- Messages
- 9,835
Originally Posted By: vwalburn
AC Delco has a dexos semi-syn. Also, haven't seen any bottles of Pennzoil, Quaker State Ultimate Durability or Mobil 1 with dexos on the label yet.
Quaker State Ultimate Durability is Dexos approved:
Quaker State Ultimate Durability + Dexos
AC Delco has a dexos semi-syn. Also, haven't seen any bottles of Pennzoil, Quaker State Ultimate Durability or Mobil 1 with dexos on the label yet.
Quaker State Ultimate Durability is Dexos approved:
Quaker State Ultimate Durability + Dexos
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2010
- Messages
- 9,835
Originally Posted By: Garak
Quaker State conventional was used exclusively with 6,000 mile OCIs, and no sludge, and no lube related failures.
My experience with QS from the 1970s was that it was a huge sludge monster (and it has nothing to do with paraffin). My 1972 Ford Gran Torino Sport with a 351C running QS for 145,000 miles with 3K OCIs resulted in 3/8"+ of sludge under the valve covers when I tore it down to rebuild it. I took really good care of that car and maintained it above and beyond the call of duty. If I had to do it again, I would not have used QS (not sure what I would have though--QS was king in those days). I have torn down quite a few engines from that era running QS and all of them had sludge in them in some form or fashion.
Perhaps one could argue that does not prove anything (after all it is just my "testimony") and that QS has changed through the years, but FWIW there have been way too many people that I have personally known have a sludge problem from that decade using QS to dismiss it.
With that said, I would not have a problem running Quaker State Ultimate Durability today, but I prefer the Pennzoil side of SOPUS as I want to support my friends in the Pennzoil organization.
Just My $0.02...
Quaker State conventional was used exclusively with 6,000 mile OCIs, and no sludge, and no lube related failures.
My experience with QS from the 1970s was that it was a huge sludge monster (and it has nothing to do with paraffin). My 1972 Ford Gran Torino Sport with a 351C running QS for 145,000 miles with 3K OCIs resulted in 3/8"+ of sludge under the valve covers when I tore it down to rebuild it. I took really good care of that car and maintained it above and beyond the call of duty. If I had to do it again, I would not have used QS (not sure what I would have though--QS was king in those days). I have torn down quite a few engines from that era running QS and all of them had sludge in them in some form or fashion.
Perhaps one could argue that does not prove anything (after all it is just my "testimony") and that QS has changed through the years, but FWIW there have been way too many people that I have personally known have a sludge problem from that decade using QS to dismiss it.
With that said, I would not have a problem running Quaker State Ultimate Durability today, but I prefer the Pennzoil side of SOPUS as I want to support my friends in the Pennzoil organization.
Just My $0.02...
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
My experience with QS from the 1970s was that it was a huge sludge monster (and it has nothing to do with paraffin). My 1972 Ford Gran Torino Sport with a 351C running QS for 145,000 miles with 3K OCIs resulted in 3/8"+ of sludge under the valve covers when I tore it down to rebuild it. I took really good care of that car and maintained it above and beyond the call of duty. If I had to do it again, I would not have used QS (not sure what I would have though--QS was king in those days). I have torn down quite a few engines from that era running QS and all of them had sludge in them in some form or fashion.
My question would be, how many other engines, treated in such a way, did you take apart back then on other conventionals? How did they look?
I'm always frightened of fuel dilution. Going from propane vehicles to a 1984 F-150 with a pooched carb is definitely night and day. Now, that was sludged (and it didn't help that the previous owner thought oil was a lifetime fluid), and it took a number of short HDEO OCIs to fix that.
Back in the early 1980s, I would likely not have gone 6,000 miles on QS had the engines been running on gasoline.
My experience with QS from the 1970s was that it was a huge sludge monster (and it has nothing to do with paraffin). My 1972 Ford Gran Torino Sport with a 351C running QS for 145,000 miles with 3K OCIs resulted in 3/8"+ of sludge under the valve covers when I tore it down to rebuild it. I took really good care of that car and maintained it above and beyond the call of duty. If I had to do it again, I would not have used QS (not sure what I would have though--QS was king in those days). I have torn down quite a few engines from that era running QS and all of them had sludge in them in some form or fashion.
My question would be, how many other engines, treated in such a way, did you take apart back then on other conventionals? How did they look?
I'm always frightened of fuel dilution. Going from propane vehicles to a 1984 F-150 with a pooched carb is definitely night and day. Now, that was sludged (and it didn't help that the previous owner thought oil was a lifetime fluid), and it took a number of short HDEO OCIs to fix that.
Back in the early 1980s, I would likely not have gone 6,000 miles on QS had the engines been running on gasoline.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2010
- Messages
- 9,835
Originally Posted By: Garak
My question would be, how many other engines, treated in such a way, did you take apart back then on other conventionals? How did they look?
More than a few; I was the "shade tree" mechanic/hot rodder for my part of the community and tore down many engines for head gaskets, lifter/cam changes, and the like. I also worked part time at a mechanic's shop who had been in business 40+ years. Without exception, on a car that had the QS stickers in the inside door well that indicated long term use of QS, had sludge built up in them when we opened them up.
Valvoline, Havoline, Kendall, Gulfpride, Pennzoil, and Castrol engines had some varnish in them, but not the creamy, muddy sludge that QS produced. All of these engines were gasoline and used carburetors (this was pre-mainstream FI). Take it FWIW; this was my experience and I believe there is some credence to the QS lore involving sludge (regardless of the paraffin discussions surrounding QS).
My question would be, how many other engines, treated in such a way, did you take apart back then on other conventionals? How did they look?
More than a few; I was the "shade tree" mechanic/hot rodder for my part of the community and tore down many engines for head gaskets, lifter/cam changes, and the like. I also worked part time at a mechanic's shop who had been in business 40+ years. Without exception, on a car that had the QS stickers in the inside door well that indicated long term use of QS, had sludge built up in them when we opened them up.
Valvoline, Havoline, Kendall, Gulfpride, Pennzoil, and Castrol engines had some varnish in them, but not the creamy, muddy sludge that QS produced. All of these engines were gasoline and used carburetors (this was pre-mainstream FI). Take it FWIW; this was my experience and I believe there is some credence to the QS lore involving sludge (regardless of the paraffin discussions surrounding QS).
Originally Posted By: 2010_FX4
Valvoline, Havoline, Kendall, Gulfpride, Pennzoil, and Castrol engines had some varnish in them, but not the creamy, muddy sludge that QS produced. All of these engines were gasoline and used carburetors (this was pre-mainstream FI). Take it FWIW; this was my experience and I believe there is some credence to the QS lore involving sludge (regardless of the paraffin discussions surrounding QS).
I certainly cannot dispute your experience. It's just that mine differs, and the major difference with my experience was the absolute lack of fuel dilution. And I certainly didn't change the oil ridiculously often, either.
Valvoline, Havoline, Kendall, Gulfpride, Pennzoil, and Castrol engines had some varnish in them, but not the creamy, muddy sludge that QS produced. All of these engines were gasoline and used carburetors (this was pre-mainstream FI). Take it FWIW; this was my experience and I believe there is some credence to the QS lore involving sludge (regardless of the paraffin discussions surrounding QS).
I certainly cannot dispute your experience. It's just that mine differs, and the major difference with my experience was the absolute lack of fuel dilution. And I certainly didn't change the oil ridiculously often, either.
- Status